[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [PATCH v5 4/4] blockdev: honor bdrv_try_set_aio_context() context re
From: |
Sergio Lopez |
Subject: |
Re: [PATCH v5 4/4] blockdev: honor bdrv_try_set_aio_context() context requirements |
Date: |
Fri, 20 Dec 2019 11:34:05 +0100 |
User-agent: |
mu4e 1.2.0; emacs 26.2 |
Sergio Lopez <address@hidden> writes:
> Sergio Lopez <address@hidden> writes:
>
>> Kevin Wolf <address@hidden> writes:
>>
>>> Am 13.12.2019 um 21:59 hat Eric Blake geschrieben:
>>>> On 12/9/19 10:06 AM, Kevin Wolf wrote:
>>>> > Am 28.11.2019 um 11:41 hat Sergio Lopez geschrieben:
>>>> > > bdrv_try_set_aio_context() requires that the old context is held, and
>>>> > > the new context is not held. Fix all the occurrences where it's not
>>>> > > done this way.
>>>> > >
>>>> > > Suggested-by: Max Reitz <address@hidden>
>>>> > > Signed-off-by: Sergio Lopez <address@hidden>
>>>> > > ---
>>>>
>>>> > Or in fact, I think you need to hold the AioContext of a bs to
>>>> > bdrv_unref() it, so maybe 'goto out' is right, but you need to unref
>>>> > target_bs while you still hold old_context.
>>>>
>>>> I suspect https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1779036 is also a
>>>> symptom of this. The v5 patch did not fix this simple test case:
>>>
>>> Speaking of a test case... I think this series should probably add
>>> something to iotests.
>>
>> Okay, I'll try to add one.
>
> So I've been working on this, but it turns out that the issue isn't
> reproducible with 'accel=qtest'. I guess that's because the devices
> using the nodes aren't really active in this situation.
>
> Is it allowed to use 'accel=kvm:tcg' in iotests? I see test 235 does
> that, but I'm not sure if that's just an exception.
Please ignore this, it was another issue.
Thanks,
Sergio.
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
Re: [PATCH v5 4/4] blockdev: honor bdrv_try_set_aio_context() context requirements, Sergio Lopez, 2019/12/18